Behavioral Differences Between Bass Species

[SENKOSAM]

 

This learning ability is survival instinct, if they don't have it, they don't survive.

I don't think learning to survive is applicable since the survival instinct is already part of an animal's DNA encoding. It doesn't need to learn to feed or be coached by it's parents - it automatically begins feeding after it's hatched and automatically increases the size of its prey as it get older and larger. As far as finding sources of food, it may just hang out waiting for prey to come to it, run with schools or migrate a distance where it senses prey will be. Patterns consist of anglers learning which choice a population of bass chooses to be near a food source in a specific water.

 

The soft plastic worm doesn't give off many negative signals to bass, the only negatives are color, line, hook, weight , unnatural smells and movements.

 

When noting negatives of a bait (and you mentioned quite a few!), many anglers don't take into account the simple fact that BASS SIMPLY DON'T CARE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE INCAPABLE. Why do they inhale a plastic worm or any other slow moving bait they have a long time to study and think about? Fact is nothing in their DNA gives them any cognitive ability and their instinct for survival only goes so far and in fact falls far short when it comes to animals that prey on them and anglers that hunt them.

 

When a color or bait seems to catch less bass, 

 

did anglers tire of catching bass on weenies or did the bass learn to avoid it?

The first statement IMO is far more likely, the second one never proven in a large sample of waters by a large number of experienced bass anglers. Keith Jones in Knowing Bass gives a plausible explanation plastic worms and minnow shaped lures work:

 

As primary piscivores, bass are predisposed to seek objects with the long body style of prey fish. Other anatomical details such as appendages likely play a secondary role. Inborn tendencies are not unknown in the science of animal behavior. Many species come equipped with instinctive behaviors that are released by the appearance of specific key stimuli. The relationship between the instinctive behavior and its stimulus is like that between a lock and key.

and

 

Natural is a human term, not a bass term.Whether the shape is natural or unnatural is of no consequence. Anglers would do better to focus on the features of shape that activate strike behavior and then exploit those features for greater effect.

 

Back to color preference:

 

There is no consensus among bass anglers (or bass) that one color is reliably better than all others at all times and places. All pure colors and color patterns score the same. If bass have a favorite color, they're keeping it a secret. The ease with which bass can spot a lure against the prevailing background, lure detectability, is often more important than the lure's color.

 

Another factor Jones mentions is the importance of lure size range. Some bass prefer lures in a size range on the small side, others respond to  a range of larger sizes, but any bass may hit any one size lure, small, medium or large, anytime conditions are ideal outside the range.

 

 

All of the above give me reasons to chose certain baits in certain colors, none having to do with a non-existent fish intelligence so many believe exists. Lock & key, like binary computer code - on or off, makes more sense when it comes to lure success.

[Catt]

KyakR, couple questions

Was y'all research done in the wild?

Would it not stand to reason that if your research was true we would soon no longer be able to catch bass because they would simply stop hitting lures?

[Catt]

WRB, Please explain Black-N-Blue Jigs?

Also explain why bird dogs instinctively know how to hunt but bass have to learn how to hunt?

[coryn h. fishowl]

I would go one step further - it also has to feel, move, taste of and smell  alive - or in other words, sense provoking.  I believe a bass is wired to know the difference between realistic looking lures and a live protein source it's supposed to simulate, never confusing the two in the wild. Plus I agree with your statement,

  I'll go one step further: Some lures have unique characteristics that simulate the action of a prey animal regardless of overall appearance (ie spinnerbait in your example); other lure actions primarily just make them take notice and challenge them by being a bit too flashy in appearance or motions within their zones of aggression.

 

The fluke and Mann's Shadow are perfect examples of action simulations close to those of minnows. The waddle of swimbaits simulate that of a cat fish/ mad tom. The quiver/flash of a 3" Rapala (in the right hands) simulates that of a minnow in it's last gasps near the surface, while the suspending X-Rap simulates something different - a fish pausing mid-depth. Granted, these simulations of actions and motion may not be convincing to a bass that the lure is a real animal, but simulated actions can't hurt when bass are already primed for action, needing that extra push. Finesse lures and their presentations are mostly successful due to live bait action-simulations and anglers buy many of the most expensive plugs because they excel at providing that something that triggers a response when worked slowly.

 

Sudden reflex responses don't require finesse and highly unrealistic looking and moving lures fit into a lure category that challenges a bass, raising its aggression level in the shortest period of time. Fast moving, wide-wobble crankbaits and burned, large willow leaf spinnerbaits don't give a fish time to raise its aggression level slowly and multiple strikes sometimes happen in the same area (but only when the time is right  to use those lures).

 

Nice talking to you coryn along the lines of conjecture based on experience . Fish aren't logical, but anglers should be, though many are very successful believing conventional reasons fish strike lures. I haven't taught my grandkids those reasons and they do very well catching fish near their casts on lures that may or may not simulate. After seeing a worm squirm on the hook, they will never use live bait again!

Sometimes that is the best.  Predatory behavioral studies show that when attacking a group, the predator will always pick out the different animal, it is easily kept track of.  There is a reason albino animals are rare.

[WRB]

WRB, Please explain Black-N-Blue Jigs?

Also explain why bird dogs instinctively know how to hunt but bass have to learn how to hunt?

You can't catch a cold using black and blue jigs in the lakes in SoCal, unless it's at night! Up in the NorCal delta black and bue or all blue works great, the difference is water clarity. In both places our crayfish (crawdads) are reddish brown or greenish brown in the wild. Bass know how to hunt, they just change the prey preference as they get to be adults. Have you ever caught a finger length bass, they are hunters.

Tom

[coryn h. fishowl]

 

Tom made a comment on another thread about the transition of LMB from eating phytoplankton when fry to eating other fish (he called it piscivory)......how fish that make that transition earlier than the others are more successful survivors. It blows me away how many factors interact to produce a certain behavior in any animal! It's a beautiful thing! The article I quoted perked my ears up because it made a connection between actual genes and one behavior without elaborating on what genes and how they work to influence behavior. The idea that LMB's genes actually change in response to us was new to me. But  SENKOSAM clarified this when he pointed out that because bass don't exactly have much between the ears (?), reflexive and instinctual behavior are in the driver's seat, and these are powerfully mediated by genes. I'm wonky by nature, and love to read.....but though I have years on the water I never had a teacher to point out the big picture and help me connect the dots. That makes all the difference, no matter that I can read the science. So here's another one, he he    

 

I absolutely love evolutionary biology (especially in context to behavior,) I am ravenously devouring two books on animal behavior.  This study you quoted reminded me of the Galapagos Finch study by Peter and Rosemary Grant. (Look it up, it is fascinating.)  Your posts on this thread have really brought it into a more academic context. 

Interesting fact of the day: Sand Tiger Sharks have two uteri in which eggs hatch internally.  In each one, the most developed embryo cannibalizes its weaker siblings. Eventually, only two (in seperate uteri) remain, and are born.

[coryn h. fishowl]

You can't catch a cold using black and blue jigs in the lakes in SoCal, unless it's at night! Up in the NorCal delta black and bue or all blue works great, the difference is water clarity. In both places our crayfish (crawdads) are reddish brown or greenish brown in the wild. Bass know how to hunt, they just change the prey preference as they get to be adults. Have you ever caught a finger length bass, they are hunters.

Tom

What I find funny is that the blue and purple end of the visible light spectrum is where bass have the poorest vision, and yet it still stands.

 

Also, when one says that bass have no cognition, they must think about what cognition is.  If it is in the sense of self-awareness or abstract thinking, then no, but their brains are beautifully hardwired to allow them to survive, with remarkable memory and reaction time. However, there are many animals that are underrated in recognition of their intellect, such as crows, who have mental abilities to rival chimps and are crowned as one of the most intelligent animals on the planet.

[Catt]

coryn h. fishowl

Merriam-Webster: cognition

Mental activities; the activities of thinking, understanding, learning, & remembering.

A bass can do none of the above

[Catt]

There is a lot of information flying around under the guise of "science", one must keep in mind if it is not observable, testable, repeatable, & falsifiable it aint science. If the study, research, or what ever you call is does not meet all four every single time it is nothing more than interesting information.

[SENKOSAM]

There is a lot of information flying around under the guise of "science", one must keep in mind if it is not observable, testable, repeatable, & falsifiable it aint science. If the study, research, or what ever you call is does not meet all four every single time it is nothing more than interesting information.

The proof will always be in the catching and catching consistently.

Interesting that of all the pros that have made it to the top, very few use the same lures, colors and presentations in the same cover or on the same structure to be in the top ten in any given tournament. Could a co-angler have done as well using something different? Many have, many haven't.

 

Science falls short trying to predict what a bass will strike, when and where it will strike or how often. Many pros fail to make even the top 40 in many tournaments, which suggests that knowing thy water is as important as what to cast and that luck, in many instances, is the deciding factor, all things being equal.

 

Boxing oneself into a corner because of any information source ultimately limits one's success and today's truth may be less than accurate or false tomorrow. Flukes happen!

 

That pretty much says it all.

[KyakR]

KyakR, couple questions

Was y'all research done in the wild?

Would it not stand to reason that if your research was true we would soon no longer be able to catch bass because they would simply stop hitting lures?

Good point....made me think  The research I quoted began with an artificial truncation selection, which only means human beings did it, not nature in the wild. They picked the fish in each group and bred them. And yes! You're describing exactly what happens in highly pressured waters......the question the research asked was "why?" And they hoped to establish that the bass are affected at the genetic level, which was news to me! Didn't mean to go nuts about it tho

But I've gotten wide of coryn h. fishowl's original question. Different strains of bass. Tom's comments about FLMB vs NLMB got to the heart of the matter I think......

[Catt]

So in other words, no this research was not in the wild, it was forced by man!

[Brian Needham]

Catt, you sir must carry a hammer in your pocket.....

[Catt]

Catt, you sir must carry a hammer in your pocket.....

Nope it's in the back of the truck

[PABASS]

So in other words, no this research was not in the wild, it was forced by man!

In this day and age what wasn't forced by humans?  SMB are not native to our rivers, they were released by a train crash carrying them so even if the study was done on this large sample it still would be forced by humans.  I don't think LMB for that matter are native to PA and many other areas in the US.  I think what this showed was eventual outcomes based on a small sample group that in nature could be an eventual outcome.  Its all about replicating the results and if this was proved its starts becoming science.  

[Catt]

The study of wildlife in cages or an aquarium is not science.

You can not have human interference & call it science.

[PABASS]

What defines a cage?  Is a one acre pond a cage? For that matter PA doesn't have many natural lakes, we have a big one of course but most lakes and ponds are man made.  This goes back to intellect are we saying that bass know what a cage is or that a bass knows a aquarium isn't "natural"?

[Catt]

If you want to believe bass in an aquarium act the same as bass in the wild have fun with that.

Oh by the way Texas only has one natural lake...so what's you point?

[coryn h. fishowl]

coryn h. fishowl

Merriam-Webster: cognition

Mental activities; the activities of thinking, understanding, learning, & remembering.

A bass can do none of the above

Exactly, but it is a word, like legions of others, so often used out of context. That was part of my point

[pbizzle]

Good point....made me think  The research I quoted began with an artificial truncation selection, which only means human beings did it, not nature in the wild. They picked the fish in each group and bred them. And yes! You're describing exactly what happens in highly pressured waters......the question the research asked was "why?" And they hoped to establish that the bass are affected at the genetic level, which was news to me! Didn't mean to go nuts about it tho

But I've gotten wide of coryn h. fishowl's original question. Different strains of bass. Tom's comments about FLMB vs NLMB got to the heart of the matter I think......

Now I have a question. If bass in a highly pressured lake will stop hitting a certain lure that they've grown accustomed to why don't they just stop eating the prey that the lure mimics?

[slonezp]

Now I have a question. If bass in a highly pressured lake will stop hitting a certain lure that they've grown accustomed to why don't they just stop eating the prey that the lure mimics?

There's a 20 page discussion on the site somewhere that will answer or will not answer this exact question.

[slonezp]

I lied. It was only 8 pages http://www.bassresource.com/bass-fishing-forums/topic/115106-fish-becoming-conditioned/page-1?hl=+fish +becoming +conditioned

[coryn h. fishowl]

KyakR, couple questions

Was y'all research done in the wild?

Would it not stand to reason that if your research was true we would soon no longer be able to catch bass because they would simply stop hitting lures?

No, lures change and pressure on lakes fluctuates, so this wouldn't remain a consistent factor to the point that our innovation would get outpaced.

 

So in other words, no this research was not in the wild, it was forced by man!

 

 

 

In this day and age what wasn't forced by humans?  SMB are not native to our rivers, they were released by a train crash carrying them so even if the study was done on this large sample it still would be forced by humans.  I don't think LMB for that matter are native to PA and many other areas in the US.  I think what this showed was eventual outcomes based on a small sample group that in nature could be an eventual outcome.  Its all about replicating the results and if this was proved its starts becoming science.  

 

 

What defines a cage?  Is a one acre pond a cage? For that matter PA doesn't have many natural lakes, we have a big one of course but most lakes and ponds are man made.  This goes back to intellect are we saying that bass know what a cage is or that a bass knows a aquarium isn't "natural"?

 

 

If you want to believe bass in an aquarium act the same as bass in the wild have fun with that.

Oh by the way Texas only has one natural lake...so what's you point?

Actually aquariums can offer a fairly realistic view into bass behavior.  Take, for example, an experiment with bass showing that they prefered crawfish lures with no legs/claws to "healthy craws!"  We can assume that the tank water was clear, the plastics were realistic, and that the bass had some experience with real crawfish before.  Taking this into account, the bass, having learned form actual crawfish, know that the claws are defensive weapons, and would of course go for the easier meal, i.e. the injured lure.  However, we can infer that the tank bass, living in gin-clear water, are mostly sight predators, as compared to their stained/muddy water dwelling counterparts, who use their lateral line and nose more.  This allows us to predict that stained water bass may prefer a "Healthy" lure with intact appendages offering more vibration and a better overall multisensory appeal.

[coryn h. fishowl]

Now I have a question. If bass in a highly pressured lake will stop hitting a certain lure that they've grown accustomed to why don't they just stop eating the prey that the lure mimics?

Exactly why lures imitating forage accurately don't get burn out easily.

[SENKOSAM]

There are many lures that always work regardless how many anglers use them depending on the water, which kind of negates the lure burn out idea. A few I can always depend on most times of day:

jigs and trailers

soft plastics in different designs (creature baits, grub minnows, drop shot plastics)